buy custom The Tempe PD Network Implementation essay

buy custom The Tempe PD Network Implementation essay Community policing has always been a core operational fabric of the Temple Police Department. The focus was to ensure that the police and the community work together to define and develop solutions to crime and quality-of-life problems. Social order in the community is primarily the outcome of informal social processes rather than the result of formal social control mechanisms such as police activity. It is thus important to stimulate citizen participation in crime participation and problem-solving activities in the community. As Tempe is situated in a strong technological environment, the use of Information System by the police department to enhance community policing is of prevalence. Since the implementation of the philosophy in 1988, residents of Tempe have expected an innovative action from the police department. Officers who are working at a specified beats need to develop an inherent problem-solving goals with their immediate supervisors. To effectively achieve this phenomenon , the officers are to be deployed in their respective beats for a minimum period of one year. As such, some of the lessons that have been learned from Tempe Police Departments Network implementation include problem solving process, centralization of IT systems, implementation of crime analysis Unit, and effective operation analysis. Centralization At one time, technology was decentralized but ever since the cost and complexity of technology increased, the city centralized all IT systems including that of the police department into one city Information Technology Division (ITD) (Webb et al., 1999). It was a positive move in the police force structure, however, some of the communications staff and patrol commanders were unwilling to hand over the control of IT to the centralized IT systems management. Financially, the city was able to coordinate IT effectively, as they could be able to better integrate the systems and, through the economies of scale, buy in bulk some of the IT components. In order to prompt the activities of the police department, the city assigned ITD business analyst to the department to advocate and liaison for activities in the sector. Centralization of the IT systems has enhanced the police department to successfully plan information technology acquisitions in order to support community policing in Tempe re gion. The decision of absorbing the four police positions and the accompanying responsibilities in order to pave way for the condensed or centralized organization is linked to the view that police officers will fare well in most of the decision making processes and procedures. The integration of IT across the city departments ensured that standardized Oracle database is achieved for all mid-to large size databases which are then managed by ITD (Buren, 2007). Centralization of IT system is not seen as self-serving but rather communal serving. The reorganization ensured that Criminal Justice Operations Committee an Criminal Justice Automation Committee were merged. Indeed, centralization enhanced knowledgeable service administrators to handle the IT decisions rather than the less-qualified police employees. Effective Operations analysis The Workload Committee has been established by Tempe Police Department to oversee and analyze the administrative and operational data so as to enhance resource allocation planning. The Staff Wizard software program is used by the department to enhance data analysis for easy development of schedules for beta officer staffing. It uses a variety of data including calls for service, average response for calls having wide priorities, and miles patrolled to provide an approximate best schedule for officers (Webb et al., 1999). The software ensures that officers deployment decision is well shaped. In some instances, the software uses Calls-for-service (CFS) data and other operations and administrative data to generate draft schedules that can be coherently reviewed by the supervisors, and make informed decisions and recommendations where there is need for schedule adjustment to the command staff. Tempe articulated to this Staff Wizard and Corona systems worked effectively with the departmen t in order to test, modify, and refine the software. The established Staff Wizard has ensured that the crime trends that are prepared by the crime analysis unit represent a form of scanning, albeit somewhat informal. As the crime analysis develops a very large quantity of useful information, systematic scanning is not use by the management in developing a decisive implementation. The departments coordinated efforts with the city agencies, such as the planning and development and traffic engineering, also involve it in the limited scanning processes. Implementation of Crime analysis unit The Tempe Police Department Crime Analysis Unit is a good example of how crime analysis can use CFS data and make it useful to beat officers. As such, much of the responsibility for using police information systems in supporting Community policing rests with Crime Analysis Unit. The unit undertakes analyses that aim at identifying crime trends, which are relative to small geographic areas. Trends are always considered the beginning of crime hot spots. Contrary to this, trend also provides information on suspects and crime characteristics (Kappeler, 2009). Ideally, the staff performs three types of analysisstrategic, administrative, and tactical. The unit provides police information to citizens of Tempe either through individual request or the Tempe Police website. The projects that were initiated successfully by Crime Analysis Unit are the monthly reports on police activity and crime, an ongoing series of tactical crime trend reports, and monthly and annual reports on crime and calls -for-service by specified land uses. Under the information systems that are imminent in the Crime Analysis Unit, the use of Computer-aided dispatch (CAD) has been implemented positively. The system uses the Publlic Safety Systems Incorporated (PSSI) designed and supported software. Indeed, the unit also produces a number of maps that can be accessed by citizens on the Tempe Police Department website. These include monthly Part I crime hot spot maps and the beat maps. Maps are aimed at determining the reporting district location of their own address based on the information available in the system. In conducting an annual survey on citizen and preparing a report that summarizes the survey findings, the crime analysis unit is quite effective. The site is elaborates and contains various categories of information ranging from sex offender to crime prevention database. As such, the Tempe Crime Analysis Unit is most importantly a key component in forging a community interface with residents. Development of CAD-based system for the documentation of officer time spent on solving a problem is clearly inclined and permits automated level-of-effort data aggregation and summarization. Indeed, the vital objective is to quantify such activities so as to incorporate it into performance reviews and strategic management decisions that are related to department resource allocation (Webb et al., 1999). The department is able to evaluate the performance of each officer on both traditional and Community-Oriented policing activities. As such, under the Additional Work Group section of Performance Evaluation where the officers are evaluated on proactive problem solving, team project participation, and beat ownership. In addition, solicitation of citizens input is done through variety of methods with the help of community policing. Tempe is organized into various beats that enhances dissemination of information from the central core unit. Beat officers seem to be well aware of the require ments for beat problem-solving projects, and officers and line supervisors appear to develop intimate understanding of the neighborhood encompassed in their beat. Conclusion Fighting crime needs an effective way of disseminating information this is achieved through community policing strategy and networking. Tempe Police department have spearheaded in undertaking this implementation in the police department and it has achieved immensely from the operations. Centralization of IT systems has been done under one unit and this has enhanced the control and management of the police activities. It has ensured that decision making process does not conflict among the police departments. In addition, Effective Operations analyses have been undertaken prior to the establishment of Tempe Police Department that oversee and analyze the administrative and operational data so as to enhance resource allocation planning. Implementation of Crime analysis unit that uses CFS data and making it useful to beat officers has been achieved in the city. As such, much of the responsibility for using police information systems in supporting Community policing rests with Crime Analys is Unit. It is clear that articulation to the Tempe Police Departments Network implementation will enhance community-oriented policing. Buy custom The Tempe PD Network Implementation essay

Definition of the Elsewhere Principle in Linguistics

Definition of the Elsewhere Principle in Linguistics In linguistics, the Elsewhere Principle is the proposition that the application of a specific rule or operation overrides the application of a more general rule. Also known as the Subset Principle, the Elsewhere Condition, and the Paninian Principle. American linguist Stephen R. Anderson points out that the Elsewhere Principle is invoked by [Stephen R.] Anderson (1969), [Paul] Kiparsky (1973), [Mark] Aronoff (1976), Anderson (1986), [Arnold M.] Zwicky (1986), etc., with antecedents going back to [the fourth century BC Sanskrit grammarian] PÄ Ã¡ ¹â€¡ini, [19th-century German linguist] Hermann Paul, and probably others (A-Morphous Morphology, 1992). Examples and Observations [T]he basic case of competition in morphology can be characterized by the Elsewhere Principle: a more specific form is preferred over a more general one where both are in principle grammatical. By definition, competitors are those forms that can be used to express the same concepts. It is possible, therefore, that competing structures are generated in different components, in particular, morphology and syntax. A well-known example involves the English comparative affix -er, which must attach to short (maximally bisyllabic) adjectives . . .. This morpheme is in competition with the syntactic modifier more, which can in principle attach to both short and long adjectives, and is therefore the more general form. In the context of short adjectives, the Elsewhere Principle dictates that -er blocks more . . .. (We add (19e) to show that in circumstances where the Elsewhere Principle does not apply more can indeed modify short adjectives.) (19a) Bigger(19b) *Intelligenter(19c) *More big(19d) More intelligent(19e) Bigger means more big This classical application of the Elsewhere Principle demonstrates that a morphological complex can be in competition with a syntactic phrase. . . .It does not seem too much to say that one of the core phenomena of morphology, and perhaps of grammar in general, is that one form can compete with, and hence block, others. The classical cases of such competition involve inflectional morphology as regulated by the Elsewhere Principle. . . . [W]e have argued that there are many more examples of competition, which differ from the classical case in terms of the nature of the candidates and the selecting restraints. (Peter Ackema and Ad Neeleman, Word-Formation in Optimality Theory. Handbook of Word-Formation, ed. by Pavol Ã…  tekauer and Rochelle Lieber. Springer, 2005 Mapping Rules An idiosyncratic mapping rule need not mention a single morpho-syntactic terminal; it can also apply to combinations of (morpho-)syntactic material. For example, next to the mapping rules that associate TOOTH with /tooth/ and PLURAL with /z/, there is a mapping rule which relates [TOOTH PLURAL] to [/teeth/]. This rule can be formulated as follows, where P(X) stands for the phonological realization of a syntactic entity X: If PLURAL selects (a category headed by) TOOTH,then P(TOOTH, PLURAL) /teeth/ Since this mapping rule is more specific than the one that only mentions PLURAL, the elsewhere principle states that the latter is blocked where the former can apply, ruling out *[/tooth/ /z/]. Note that this does not mean that the lexicon contains multiple morpho-syntactic morphemes that represent plurality (there is only one plural affix). (Peter Ackema and Ad Neeleman, Morphological Selection and Representational Modularity. Yearbook of Morphology 2001, ed. by Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle. Kluwer, 2002) Illustration and Qualification Two elements are important in the Elsewhere Principle. First, it inactivates rules in particular cases as a property of the rule system as a whole. Second, it does so in virtue of a logical relationship between rules: entailment between application conditions. The rule that is inactivated by a second rule applying to the same case applies to all cases to which the second rule applies.The English plural is formed by adding a morpheme -s to the end of a stem. A number of words have special plurals, such as goose, which has the plural geese. The existence of the nonregular plural (a remainder of an older plural; formation by means of vowel shift) rules out the regular form *gooses.The rule that assigns geese has the application condition stem goose, which is more specific than the application condition stem X4 for the regular plural formation. It follows by the Elsewhere Principle that the regular rule for plural formation does not apply to goose.There is an important caveat with the Elsewhere Principle: It does not always lead to the right conclusion. It is sometimes possible for the irregular form to coexist with the regular form, and sometimes there is neither an irregular nor a regular form. In these cases, the Elsewhere Principle would predict the absence of a regular form or the presence of a regular form, respectively, predictions that are not borne out by the facts. It follows that in these cases another explanation needs to be sought. (Henk Zeevat, Idiomatic Blocking and the Elsewhere Principle. Idioms: Structural and Psychological Perspectives, ed. by Martin Everaert et al. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1995) Further Reading GrammarMorphologyPhonologyRules of EnglishSyntax